Differential benefit of sensor system field-of-view and range in pedestrian automated emergency braking systems

References

• Belyaev AA, Suanov TA, Frolov IO, Trots DO. 2019. The range of pedestrian detection with automotive radar. Proceedings of the 2019 Radiation and Scattering of Electromagnetic Waves (RSEMW); 24–28 June. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/RSEMW.2019.8792756
   Google Scholar
• Combs TS, Sandt LS, Clamann MP, McDonald NC. 2019. Automated vehicles and pedestrian safety: exploring the promise and limits of pedestrian detection. Am J Prev Med. 56(1):1–7. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2018.06.024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ETSI. 2020. System Reference document (SRdoc); Transmission characteristics; Technical characteristics for radiodetermination equipment for ground based vehicular applications within the frequency range 77 GHz to 81 GHz, Vol. 1.1.1, No. ETSI TR 103 593.
   Google Scholar
• Gandhi T, Trivedi MM. 2007. Pedestrian protection systems: issues, survey, and challenges. IEEE Trans Intell Transport Syst. 8(3):413–430. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2007.903444
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gates TJ, Noyce DA, Bill AR, An Ee NV. 2006. Recommended walking speeds for pedestrian clearance timing based on pedestrian characteristics. TRB Annual Meeting.
   Google Scholar
• Governors Highway Safety Association. 2021. Pedestrian traffic fatalities by state: 2020 preliminary data, March.
   Google Scholar
• Gruber M, Kolk H, Tomasch E, Feist F, Klug C, Schneider A, Roth F, Labenski V, Shanmugam K, Lindman M, et al. 2019. The effect of P-AEB system parameters on the effectiveness for real world pedestrian accidents. Proceedings of International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Haus SH, Sherony R, Gabler HC. 2018. Feasibility of using naturalistic driving data to characterise vehicle-pedestrian crashes and near crashes. Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference; Athens, Greece.
   Google Scholar
• Haus SH, Sherony R, Gabler HC. 2019. Estimated benefit of automated emergency braking systems for vehicle-pedestrian crashes in the United States. Traffic Inj Prev. 20(sup1):S171–S176. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2019.1602729
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jermakian JS, Zuby DS. 2011. Primary pedestrian crash scenarios: factors relevant to the design of pedestrian detection systems. Arlington, VA: Insurance Instsitute for Highway Safety.
   Google Scholar
• Lefler DE, Gabler HC. 2004. The fatality and injury risk of light truck impacts with pedestrians in the United States. Accid Anal Prev. 36(2):295–304. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(03)00007-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohammed AS, Amamou A, Ayevide FK, Kelouwani S, Agbossou K, Zioui N. 2020. The perception system of intelligent ground vehicles in all weather conditions: a systematic literature review. Sensors. 20(22):8–22. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/s20226532
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 2018. National automotive sampling system general estimates system analytical user's manual, 1988-2015. (DOT HS 812 320), Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• NHTSA (National Automotive Sampling System Pedestrian Crash Data Study). 1996. Data collection, coding, and editing manual, department of transportation, Editor. Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Rosén E, Källhammer J-E, Eriksson D, Nentwich M, Fredriksson R, Smith K. 2010. Pedestrian injury mitigation by autonomous braking. Accid Anal Prev. 42(6):1949–1957. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.05.018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scanlon JM, Sherony R, Gabler HC. 2017. Injury mitigation estimates for an intersection driver assistance system in straight crossing path crashes in the United States. Traffic Inj Prev. 18(sup1):S9–S17. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2017.1300257
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang L, Shi Y, He Q, Sadek AW, Qiao C. 2020. Performance test of autonomous vehicle lidar sensors under different weather conditions. Transp Res Rec. 2674(1):319–329. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198120901681
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wakeman K, Moore M, Zuby D, Hellinga L. 2017. Effect of Subaru eyesight on pedestrian-related bodily injury liability claim frequencies. Arlington, VA: Bulletin, H.L.D. Institute, Editor. https://www.iihs.org/api/datastoredocument/bibliography/1888
   Google Scholar
• Yanagisawa M, Swanson ED, Azeredo P, Najm W. 2017. Estimation of potential safety benefits for pedestrian crash avoidance/mitigation systems (DOT HS 812 400). Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
   Google Scholar